It’s happened before. The BBC reported in March 2013:

Sikh weddings are regularly disrupted by protesters opposed to mixed-faith marriages in gurdwaras, a BBC Asian Network investigation has found.

Victims and their families have accused the protesters – who believe non-Sikhs should not be getting married in Sikh temples – of threatening behaviour.

In some cases, protesters have barricaded themselves inside gurdwaras to prevent ceremonies taking place.

Last year the windows of a family’s house in Coventry were smashed.

That happened right before a “mixed” wedding in a nearby gurdwara.

The father of the bride told BBC Asian Network the house was targeted because his daughter was marrying a Hindu in a Sikh temple.

He said: “Some of these people didn’t want the wedding to go ahead. This was the way for them to frighten me.”

The couple ended up having a police escort for the wedding.

In another incident, a bunch of “protesters” locked a couple out of their own wedding in Swindon – the “protesters” inside the gates, the people who wanted to get married outside.

One of the protesters, speaking anonymously to the BBC Asian Network, said: “The last thing I want is to go to a gurdwara and cause trouble. I can say hand on heart that we have never resorted to violence. We don’t want to do this.”

But he said he believed it was hypocritical for a bride or groom to go through a ceremony when they do not truly believe in the Sikh faith.

See there it is again, that ridiculous idea that the “hypocrisy” of a stranger is something he gets to act on, by forcibly preventing people from getting married in the gurdwara. That’s all wrong. It’s not his business. It’s nothing to do with him. He doesn’t get to interfere with it.

There are around 300 gurdwaras in Britain and each is run by elected committees of worshippers.

The rules on the anand karaj, which is the formal name for the Sikh wedding, are set by the religion’s governing body which is based at the Golden Temple in Amritsar, India.

In 2007 it advised gurdwaras the anand karaj should only be between two Sikhs and the protesters say some gurdwara committees are not respecting the faith by allowing non-Sikhs who do not believe in the religion to marry there.

Tough. Get on the committee if you can, try to change policy that way; other than that, it’s none of your business.

The Sikh Council – an umbrella body for Sikh organisations in the UK – has condemned the violence and threats but agrees with the sentiment of the protesters.

The council’s secretary general, Gurmel Singh, said: “I would say there is no place in a modern Britain for any community to resort to violent threatening behaviour.”

But Mr Singh said: “The person getting married has to accept the concept of one god and renounce any other beliefs they may hold which are contrary to that.

“They would also need to understand what the Sikh marriage entails. They would need to adopt (the surname) Singh or Kaur as they are what defines a Sikh. We don’t have legal powers so it is not legally enforceable but it is a social contract a contract of commitment.”

Yes, that’s it right there. It’s not legally enforceable, and thus it’s not enforceable by violent men who invade other people’s weddings, either. You can’t enforce it. Adults don’t get to enforce their rules on other adults that way.

If they’re in charge of the gurdwara, then they can refuse to perform mixed marriages. But other than that – they have to mind their own business.

Dr Piara Singh Bhogal has sat on the committee that runs the Ramgariha gurdwara in Birmingham and he said he shared the protesters’ views on Sikh-only weddings but objects to the way protesters are ruining the most important day of a couple’s life.

“This issue now is becoming quite serious because ceremonies have been disrupted. I am hearing about once a month, sometimes twice a month ceremonies are being disrupted. People are getting scared,” he said.

Less policing, more getting on with one’s own life.